Re: PEAR2 package naming standards (namespace usage)

Paul M Jones wrote:

On Aug 26, 2008, at 17:13 , Joshua Eichorn wrote:

I would like to start by saying there may be a deficiency in the RFC on explaining exactly what the naming means in terms of file system layout and svn layout since there are no examples. I would appreciate feedback on how we can make all parts of the RFC clearer. I'll start with some examples to make sure we are all on the same page. classname: pear2::foobar::Foo_Bar file layout: pear2/foobar/Foo/Bar.php svn: http://svn.pear.php.net/PEAR2/foobar/trunk/src/foobar/Foo/Bar.php

The PEAR2 vice pear2 in the svn path seems like an oversight to me. To strictly match, the svn path should be "http://svn.pear.php.net/pear2/foobar/trunk/src/foobar/Foo/Bar.php". Or am I confusing two issues here? Well the alias currently is PEAR2 but we can certainly change that, thats just a one liner in an apache config. I do agree that would match up better and cause less confusion.

In my opinion Arnaud and Greg's initial RFC wasn't enough. It largely kept the PEAR1 pattern just replacing _ with ::. I hope with futher clarification it will be clear to everyone that this RFC gives the developer much more flexibility in code organization then the PEAR1 pattern did, while also make it clearer what is the namespace and what is the Class

I like this one better than the earlier one, for sure. That's no disrespect to Arnaud and Greg though; they did a very good job setting the groundwork. This new refinement on their foundational work seems like an improved approach.

I agree, like I said at the beginning the original RFC was expecting to be changed once we actually started doing some PEAR2 work. Nothing is set in stone in pear2 until we start having stable releases for that matter, but we are trying to get things close at this point. -josh